The Virtues of Intolerance

The form of tolerance that pretends there is no such thing as evil is itself wrong.

Feb 17, 2002 -- Europeans always thought of George Bush as a Texas yokel, and now they have their proof: his "axis of evil" speech to the US Congress. "Absolutist," harrumphed European Commissioner Chris Patten. "Simplistic," shot back French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine. Any rube knows that North Korea, Iran, Iraq are neither "evil" nor linked in an "axis," says European sophisticates, appalled that they must share the same planet with riff-raff who claim otherwise.

The Europeans, of course, know full well that the regimes fingered by Bush are about as evil as they come. But even in America, words like evil are not normally used in polite company, let alone in public discourse. Modern people don't talk like that. Just a short time ago, the Clinton State Department decided to stop referring to the same states as "rogue regimes," preferring instead the less judgmental label: "countries of concern." Good people are tolerant, we Westerners like to believe. The march of progress is marked by an ability to understand the Other, and a commitment to cure humanity of the vicious hatreds that poisoned the last century. To the extent there are people who haven't gotten the message, say good Westerners, we certainly do not want to become like them.

If there is anything that is simplistic, it is acting as if tolerance is an absolute good.

If there is anything that is simplistic, however, it is acting as if tolerance is an absolute good. Of course tolerance is a necessary antidote to racism and all sorts of irrational phobias toward people and cultures whose only sin is to be different. But a form of tolerance that pretends there is no such thing as evil is itself wrong.

At some level, this is understood. Who today would argue with Edmund Burke's adage from over a century ago: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Yet there is little doubt the West has preferred to err on the side of tolerance.

What George Bush has done, and Ronald Reagan before him with his "evil empire" slam at the Soviet Union, is similar to a child crying out that the emperor has no clothes. We can treat tyrants and terrorists as if they are acceptable members of the community of nations, but that does not change who they are. And it is impossible to begin the fight back without saying the truth: they are evil.

Intolerance, far from being an anathema to progress, it is essential to it.

In a wonderful essay in the Wall Street Journal last week, Michael Novak recalled just how powerful that single judgmental word can be. "You know what caused the downfall of the Soviet Union?" Reports Novak on a conversation with an ex-Soviet general, "That damn speech about the evil empire! That's what did it!" To the questioning eyes of one American, the general added: "It was an evil empire. It was." As odd as it is to say it, intolerance, far from being an anathema to progress, it is essential to it. Progress depends on intolerance for the status quo. In the ancient world (and in some cultures today) there was no notion there could be a better future – there was only Fate. The Western idea of progress began with two Jewish concepts: that time had a moral direction, and that one people could judge another.

The Bible said history is linear: Time began with creation, and its destination was a messianic era in which there would be peace on earth. The idea that history was going somewhere and that people could do something about it was new. Though taken for granted in the West, there is nothing inevitable about this notion, and it is not shared by all cultures.

An even more fundamental concept is that God's realm extends beyond a single people. All politics is local, we say, but in ancient times, so were all gods. The Bible vividly rejected such boundaries with stories such as that of Jonah, in which God could not be escaped by setting sail on a ship.

Without monotheism and its offspring -- universal morality -- the bedrock Western notion of universal human rights is judgmental par excellence.

Without speaking of evil, it is impossible to make fundamental distinctions.

Bush seems to realize that without speaking of evil, it is impossible to make fundamental distinctions, such as between regimes that must be toppled before they obtain nuclear weapons, and countries in whose hands the same weapons can help produce peace. The significance of Bush's speech is not just in the regimes he singled out, but his frontal challenge to the idea that silence in the face of evil is sophisticated and willful blindness is moral.

The opinions expressed in the comment section are the personal views of the commenters. Comments are moderated, so please keep it civil.

Visitor Comments: 7

(7)
Gregory Keith Tobkes,
February 21, 2002 12:00 AM

Wow

You have hit the proverbial "politically correct" nail on the head.Although this concept of "intolerance" flies in the face of the anthropologists I studied in the sixties I can't help but wonder if they would not agree today with your assessment!

(6)
Anonymous,
February 21, 2002 12:00 AM

I'm glad I'm not the only one who's sick and tired of living in an entirely too tolerant society..

If we know, in our hearts, that something is "evil", why on earth do we insist on looking the other way or even going to the ridculous extreme of searching for virtues where they just do *not* exist?!? Gangsta rap and porn? Can we just call a duck a duck, please and be able to point out that these things are evil without being ridiculed for our "intolerant" perspective?? Haven't we looked the other way long enough, and is anyone willing to see the progression of evil in our society because those with moral standards have been challenged time and time again with that wonderful first ammendment argument? Is anyone else sick and tired of the way in which the first ammendment has been perverted to suit the "rights" of perverts??

And *when* will we begin applying this new and improved sense of morality to society in general?? To our media?? To our relationships and dealings with others??

Let's not stop with politics and terrorists.

(5)
Anonymous,
February 18, 2002 12:00 AM

Let's not repeat the mistakes of WWII and try to negotiate with the Hitlers of the world.

(4)
Anonymous,
February 17, 2002 12:00 AM

Judging Others

Excellent article. "Judge not, lest ye be judged." This foolish expression is in fact followed by much of the West. Sunday, 02/17/02 c.e.

(3)
Tamara Adler,
February 17, 2002 12:00 AM

off the mark

While I believe that evil should not be tolerated in the name of "Tolerance", I don't think that just by calling a nation evil you can destroy it. The problem with the "Axis of evil" is not that it morally clarifies the situation, it is that the simplistic tone coming from a shallow "sheriff" President has enraged our enemies and put us farther from peace (witness N. Korea). I don't believe that Ronald Reagan's "Evil Empire" won the Cold War, I believe that the phrase provided clarity to a system already in it's death throes. Also, why was Yasser Arafat and the PA not included in this so called "axis"?

(2)
Anonymous,
February 17, 2002 12:00 AM

The stumbling block of mankind

The cry for blind tolerance is destroying our nation. Are we supposed to be tolerant when terrorists fly airplanes into our buildings? What about when evil men strap bombs to themselves and go to the highest populated areas they can find to kill many innocent people? These things aren't just "not good". They are wrong, bad--evil. May we all refuse to go along with this facade and stand for what is right and what is true. And may we be blessed in the process.

(1)
Barbara Holtzman,
February 17, 2002 12:00 AM

Just call it the Dark Side

tolerance can be just as evil. Acceptance would be a better term- but not of behaviors. Contrary to Jummy Carter, there is a difference between "in your heart" and for real. Hate me in your heart, i'm still alive; hate me and shoot me, i'm dead.

Another answer- look at history. Has there ever been any kind of conflict where "good" hasn't had to conquer "evil" in military terms before they can make peace? i'd really like an answer to that. Evil people don't see reason, they don't care if they hurt you- they are the ultimate in selfishness. the problem is, "civilized" tolerant people don't see it until it's too late.

My nephew is having his bar mitzvah and I am thinking of a gift. In the old days, the gift of choice was a fountain pen, then a Walkman, and today an iPod. But I want to get him something special. What do you suggest?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

Since this event celebrates the young person becoming obligated in the commandments, the most appropriate gift is, naturally, one that gives a deeper understanding of the Jewish heritage and enables one to better perform the mitzvot! (An iPod, s/he can get anytime.)

With that in mind, my favorite gift idea is a tzedakah (charity) box. Every Jew should have a tzedakah box in his home, so he can drop in change on a regular basis. The money can then be given to support a Jewish school or institution -- in your home town or in Israel (every Jews’ “home town”). There are beautiful tzedakah boxes made of wood and silver, and you can see a selection here.

For boys, a really beautiful gift is a pair of tefillin, the black leather boxes which contain parchments of Torah verses, worn on the bicep and the head. Owning a pair of Tefillin (and wearing them!) is an important part of Jewish identity. But since they are expensive (about $400), not every Bar Mitzvah boy has a pair. To make sure you get kosher Tefillin, see here.

In 1944, the Nazis perpetrated the Children's Action in the Kovno Ghetto. That day and the next, German soldiers conducted house-to-house searches to round up all children under age 12 (and adults over 55) -- and sent them to their deaths at Fort IX. Eventually, the Germans blew up every house with grenades and dynamite, on suspicion that Jews might be in hiding in underground bunkers. They then poured gasoline over much of the former ghetto and incinerated it. Of the 37,000 Jews in Kovno before the Holocaust, less than 10 percent survived. One of the survivors was Rabbi Ephraim Oshri, who later published a stirring collection of rabbinical responsa, detailing his life-and-death decisions during the Holocaust. Also on this date, in 1937, American Jews held a massive anti-Nazi rally in New York City's Madison Square Garden.

In a letter to someone who found it difficult to study Torah, the 20th century sage the Chazon Ish wrote:

"Some people find it hard to be diligent in their Torah studies. But the difficulty persists only for a short while - if the person sincerely resolves to submerge himself in his studies. Very quickly the feelings of difficulty will go away and he will find that there is no worldly pleasure that can compare with the pleasure of studying Torah diligently."

Although actions generally have much greater impact than thoughts, thoughts may have a more serious effect in several areas.

The distance that our hands can reach is quite limited. The ears can hear from a much greater distance, and the reach of the eye is much farther yet. Thought, however, is virtually limitless in its reach. We can think of objects millions of light years away, and so we have a much greater selection of improper thoughts than of improper actions.

Thought also lacks the restraints that can deter actions. One may refrain from an improper act for fear of punishment or because of social disapproval, but the privacy of thought places it beyond these restraints.

Furthermore, thoughts create attitudes and mindsets. An improper action creates a certain amount of damage, but an improper mindset can create a multitude of improper actions. Finally, an improper mindset can numb our conscience and render us less sensitive to the effects of our actions. We therefore do not feel the guilt that would otherwise come from doing an improper act.

We may not be able to avoid the occurrence of improper impulses, but we should promptly reject them and not permit them to dwell in our mind.

Today I shall...

make special effort to avoid harboring improper thoughts.

With stories and insights,
Rabbi Twerski's new book Twerski on Machzor makes Rosh Hashanah prayers more meaningful. Click here to order...